This is all a function of the electoral system. People are more likely to vote for you if you bring them money and don't raise their taxes. Hence our current budget issue.
This is all a function of the electoral system. People are more likely to vote for you if you bring them money and don't raise their taxes. Hence our current budget issue.
Talk about proving a point: Right wing "journalists" provide damning evidance that they are the lowest, most despicable creatures to slink around in the muck.
This is appalling. Aside from the fact that it is now okay for right wing propaganda to essentially make shit up, but the fact that the White House gave them ANY credibility after ACORN or even the first time people like Beck opened their fat, sweaty mouths is equally horrifying.
Ugh. Why is everyone here so partisan? Remember Dan Rather's making stuff up against Bush? Breitbart isn't a journalist that anyone should take seriously. He's a Drudge clone. Both sides spin. Nothing new there. Breitbart wore it on his sleeve.
The real story here is just how poorly this was handled by the White House. Allowing Brietbart to dictate domestic policy isn't the best idea.
Ugh. Why is everyone here so partisan? Remember Dan Rather's making stuff up against Bush? Breitbart isn't a journalist that anyone should take seriously. He's a Drudge clone. Both sides spin. Nothing new there. Breitbart wore it on his sleeve.
The real story here is just how poorly this was handled by the White House. Allowing Brietbart to dictate domestic policy isn't the best idea.
I think there is a distinct difference between Dan Rather's single (albeit significant and equally disappointing) scandal in an otherwise significant career and Brietbart's and Carlson's constant stream of literally editing things to say something completely different than was intended. What Breitbard did is inexcusable and I hope Sherrod buries him in litigation for smearing her like he did.
I DO agree that the W.H. handled this terribly. Breitbart and Carlson should be ignored flatly with the same sort of dismissal given to Beck and Hannity. It was a knee-jerk reaction to try and keep the media focus on the issues they wanted to focus on, because it was a distraction. What they should have done is simply released the entire unedited video so that anyone with a functioning IQ could see it was all a farce. It's a shame that Sherrod can be libeled and slandered, and essentially has no recourse while Breitbart can giggle in his studio and revel in masturbatory glee at ruining the career of someone who didn't do anything wrong.
I guess we're more or less on the same page when it comes to the WH response. Your point regarding Dan Rather is well taken. It's the fact that Breitbart is so transparent that makes the administration's behavior so unconscionable. Kind of like calling a police officer's actions "stupid" before you know the facts. Breitbart may have contributed to ruining this woman's career, but that would not have happened without the White House taking the bait.
Why not cut Medicare? Surely the Republicans don't want to continue to pay for socialized medicine.
My wife's grandparents were talking (bragging!) during a recent family gathering about a hip surgery that they got "for free" because Medicare paid for $4,500 of their bill (they only paid about $800). They followed -- seemingly unknowingly -- with a conversation about the "evils of Obamacare" and how "he's a socialist determined to rob every one of us and send us to the poorhouse." I pointed out the discrepancy between the two conversations and asked them to pay the $4,500 if they felt government health coverage was evil. They demurred.
I see that on both sides do that. That's why it's so frustrating. The simple truth, IMHO, is that Bush made a lot of bad decisions, and that Obama is making some bad ones too. The same can be said for either party in the Congress. If I was president, I'd make some mistakes. It's okay to admit that someone made a bad decision. That's how your party gets better. Supporting a known bad decision for fear of acknowledging that it is possible that your party's elected official made a poor decision is childish. The greatest politicians were not perfect. That's okay. Why can't we understand that? With social issues, it's also okay to have opposing viewpoints. It is not an exact science. Reasonable minds can differ.
The biggest problem in politics is not a individual party. It's the system itself. Career politicians, funded by private interests, will never look at the big picture and do what is right, no matter the "popularity" of the decision.
I see my state legislators make very brave decisions from time to time. I never see that on a federal level. That's because it's not as tempting to cling to a $12,000 per year job with no special interests wining and dining you. Our state legislature is not perfect, but they passed gay marriage. That took some guts - whether or not you agree with what they did.
I see that on both sides do that. That's why it's so frustrating. The simple truth, IMHO, is that Bush made a lot of bad decisions, and that Obama is making some bad ones too. The same can be said for either party in the Congress. If I was president, I'd make some mistakes. It's okay to admit that someone made a bad decision. That's how your party gets better. Supporting a known bad decision for fear of acknowledging that it ispossiblethat your party's elected official made a poor decision is childish. The greatest politicians were not perfect. That's okay. Why can't we understand that? With social issues, it's also okay to have opposing viewpoints. It is not an exact science. Reasonable minds can differ.
The biggest problem in politics is not a individual party. It's the system itself. Career politicians, funded by private interests, will never look at the big picture and do what is right, no matter the "popularity" of the decision.
I see my state legislators make very brave decisions from time to time. I never see that on a federal level. That's because it's not as tempting to cling to a $12,000 per year job with no special interests wining and dining you. Our state legislature is not perfect, but they passed gay marriage. That took some guts - whether or not you agree with what they did.
I understand this. What makes me the most furious is the flagrancy of the lies that get thrown around, and how hard they are pushed as gospel. Has Obama been perfect? Hardly. Health Care, while a baby step, was a huge disappointment. This latest incident was another one. I'm still split on my reaction to the drilling moratorium, though I think I probably would have made the same decision to err on the side of caution. I'm heavily partisan because I saw the damage done by one party over the past decade, saw them lie at every single step about it, and then try and blame the other party for the problems. I can not in good conscience let a group so apparently hell-bent on ruining everything for everyone but themselves just slide by. I'm convinced the old Republican party is dead and gone and has been replaced with the political equivalent of /b/ on 4chan, only with less humor.
Although I know I'll probably regret responding, typically Veteran's groups and publications are more conservative and right-leaning. In response to your article:
Kirsten Powers is a political analyst on Fox News and a writer for the New York Post.
Granted, it is an opinion piece as well, but Beast is an aggregate site. Now, if you mean someone from Fox is comparing Obama to Bush in a negative way, granted, it's surprising. However while the revisionists are still out there trying to put a happy facade on the past administration, Fox has been doing this frequently. For example, they called the BP oil disaster "Obama's Katrina", implying that Bush screwed up during Katrina, reversing the mass defense they played way back when. I think Fox is slowly abandoning "Defend Bush at all costs" in favor of "Attack Obama's administration at all costs". Now, do I think this administration has been all unicorns and rainbows? Hardly. Criticism is warranted, but not from the journalisticly-retarded.
Not the best chart in the world, sadly. However I find the comments on the page infuriating, especially the guy who suggests that the Bush tax plan would stimulate growth. Trickle down economics worked so awesomely in the 80's.
Comments
Right wing "journalists" provide damning evidance that they are the lowest, most despicable creatures to slink around in the muck.
This is appalling. Aside from the fact that it is now okay for right wing propaganda to essentially make shit up, but the fact that the White House gave them ANY credibility after ACORN or even the first time people like Beck opened their fat, sweaty mouths is equally horrifying.
The real story here is just how poorly this was handled by the White House. Allowing Brietbart to dictate domestic policy isn't the best idea.
I DO agree that the W.H. handled this terribly. Breitbart and Carlson should be ignored flatly with the same sort of dismissal given to Beck and Hannity. It was a knee-jerk reaction to try and keep the media focus on the issues they wanted to focus on, because it was a distraction. What they should have done is simply released the entire unedited video so that anyone with a functioning IQ could see it was all a farce. It's a shame that Sherrod can be libeled and slandered, and essentially has no recourse while Breitbart can giggle in his studio and revel in masturbatory glee at ruining the career of someone who didn't do anything wrong.
The biggest problem in politics is not a individual party. It's the system itself. Career politicians, funded by private interests, will never look at the big picture and do what is right, no matter the "popularity" of the decision.
I see my state legislators make very brave decisions from time to time. I never see that on a federal level. That's because it's not as tempting to cling to a $12,000 per year job with no special interests wining and dining you. Our state legislature is not perfect, but they passed gay marriage. That took some guts - whether or not you agree with what they did.
I'm heavily partisan because I saw the damage done by one party over the past decade, saw them lie at every single step about it, and then try and blame the other party for the problems. I can not in good conscience let a group so apparently hell-bent on ruining everything for everyone but themselves just slide by. I'm convinced the old Republican party is dead and gone and has been replaced with the political equivalent of /b/ on 4chan, only with less humor.
In response to your article: Granted, it is an opinion piece as well, but Beast is an aggregate site. Now, if you mean someone from Fox is comparing Obama to Bush in a negative way, granted, it's surprising. However while the revisionists are still out there trying to put a happy facade on the past administration, Fox has been doing this frequently. For example, they called the BP oil disaster "Obama's Katrina", implying that Bush screwed up during Katrina, reversing the mass defense they played way back when. I think Fox is slowly abandoning "Defend Bush at all costs" in favor of "Attack Obama's administration at all costs".
Now, do I think this administration has been all unicorns and rainbows? Hardly. Criticism is warranted, but not from the journalisticly-retarded.
HaaaahahahahahahaBenQuayleRunsForAnythinghahahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahahahahaha!
source